This seems very attractive, although maybe a bit too much for me right now. I'll be very interested in the IQ/sharpness/etc are very good, and the build quality is decent. That and I'll probably end up waiting for a sale or for it to come down in price $100+.

I've been pining for a 35mm prime for a long while now. The 35L put me off because of cost and bulk. The old 35/2 just seemed too dated in too many ways. Now there are two new options: this sigma, and the new EF 35/2 IS. Similar price - high but doable. Sigma is significantly bulkier (twice the weight, a bit longer). Sigma has f/1.4, but Canon has IS. Tough decision.

I bet the USB port was included to reduce the number of warranty service requests. The Sigma 50mm 1.4 has some of the worst focus shift I have ever seen.

That's true. I have Sigma 50mm F/1.4. I really love it. However, this lens has to be AFMA @ +13. The number is really high. If my camera doesn't have AFMA feature, I surely will be one of the person to complain focus issue.

Perhaps because I have never seen a Vignetting graph before... but is anyone else completely astounded by the Vignetting graph of this lens at f/1.4? Shooting into a white wall will yield a white canter and almost pitch black corners! It drops to 20% of light in the corners!

I'm sure that borders the 'unacceptable' range for most images other than very 'artistic' portraits. While some vignetting can be correct in post, upping more than 2 fstops of difference is really not my ideal lens .

Of course, neither is Canon's ultra pricey f/2 version! I'd much rather have f/1.4!

Perhaps because I have never seen a Vignetting graph before... but is anyone else completely astounded by the Vignetting graph of this lens at f/1.4? Shooting into a white wall will yield a white canter and almost pitch black corners! It drops to 20% of light in the corners!

I'm sure that borders the 'unacceptable' range for most images other than very 'artistic' portraits. While some vignetting can be correct in post, upping more than 2 fstops of difference is really not my ideal lens .

Of course, neither is Canon's ultra pricey f/2 version! I'd much rather have f/1.4!

Rafa.

Actually, 2.3 stops of vignetting wide open is decent for this class of lens. For comparison, the 35L light falloff is about 3 stops in the corners wide open (according to the-digital-picture.com, at least).

Logged

Current Kit: Some cameras and a bunch of lenses, maybe even a tripod or two

Thanks for the comparative info @Freelancer and @Dianoda! It puts it into some perspective. My other surprise was the linearity of the falloff... I would have expected light decay to be more like it looks at f/5.6... as it is, it really drops fast!

@Freelancer... that MTF chart I believe is incorrectly color coded (or the legend was incorrectly labeled) so, assuming red is the usual f/8 and green is f/1.4... I'm not that impressed that there isn't a single point of the line at f/1.4 above, but that is true for Canon 35L as well. My main problem is, again, the fast drop out of the nice zone. By 1/3 of the frame you are below 0.7 and at f8 things are not much better .

Perhaps I'm being overly demanding? Of course, I prefer samples rather than charts, so I'll wait for those

From what I understand, Sigma's MTF charts only provide result for the lens wide open (this is according to Sigma's own notes in their MTF Chart guide), and performance looks great assuming this is the case. It basically matches the performance of the 35L stopped down to F8 (judging from Canon's own MTF chart) - which makes me think that I must be reading Sigma's chart incorrectly.

But seriously, that's too good, so I don't think that it's right. I'm guessing that Sigma's chart is actually stopped down performance, which case it pretty much matches a stopped down 35L. Either way, IQ should be pretty good.

« Last Edit: November 07, 2012, 01:58:06 PM by Dianoda »

Logged

Current Kit: Some cameras and a bunch of lenses, maybe even a tripod or two

From what I understand, Sigma's MTF charts only provide result for the lens wide open (this is according to Sigma's own notes in their MTF Chart guide), and performance looks great assuming this is the case. It basically matches the performance of the 35L stopped down to F8 (judging from Canon's own MTF chart) - which makes me think that I must be reading Sigma's chart incorrectly.

But seriously, that's too good, so I don't think that it's right. I'm guessing that Sigma's chart is actually stopped down performance, which case it pretty much matches a stopped down 35L. Either way, IQ should be pretty good.

But charts are just charts, doesn't mean much - the charts predicted the new 24-70/2.8 to be "THE" lens, but in real life of course it isn't and no mtf chart tells you about distortion, flare or onion bokeh.

looking at the MTF from the canon.. why do you think the sigma is worse?

Argh, sorry, you're of course correct - I mixed up the two Canon lines comparing them to the Sigma :-p ... the Sigma has the "better" chart (or more aggressive marketing division), though the line indeed goes down after 2/3 of the frame.